Hypothetical cycle questions

[Lukin2grow]

I know EQ is thought best if run for longer cycles. If someone was doing it for 10 weeks (along with test cyp and Anadrol for the first 6 weeks to start), what dosage would you all say is a good mix? Actually, shoot out an ideal dosage /week for all three if you have a suggestion...

And a PCT question. I've read a LOT of opinions on PCT and many things do not agree. Is there a current consensus that Nolvadex is relatively appropriate in almost all cases of PCT? I've heard mixed with Aromasin it's ideal.

I hear both extremes of viewpoints in regards to Clomid...it seems to be totally acceptable as a PCT drug but half of the people think Nolva is preferable.

Any thoughts?

[muscleshark]

10 weeks simply isnt long enough for Eq. Or for any cycle IMO. You want to see full results of eq then run it out 16 weeks. @10 weeks, your muscles start to mature in thier chemically enhanced state. I feel you hang on to much more when cycles are 12 to 20 weeks long, and more so if you are running Eq. As for your pct questions, aromisin is easier on your lipid profile, and nolva can lower IGF-1 levels at higher longer dosages. CLomid nolva/aromisin and HCG is an awesome pct protocol you can't go wrong with. SO I recommend all three. If you are dead set on a 10 weeker, don't bother wasting your money on Eq.

[Amoral]

My buddy's on 600mg Cyp, 400mg EQ, and 100mg Drol if that helps. He's 5'5" pushin 190 lbs and still growin...

EDIT: +1 for the 16 weeks

[canadianmuscle0803]

For EQ, min dose 400mg/week.. its been shown that anything under that dose will not do anything.. i prefer 600mg/week but I have to stay away from EQ because it gives me major anxiety.

[javin86]

Just speaking hypothetically here, but if i'm not mistaken the reason eq needs to be run so long is that it takes a long time to reach high blood concentrations due to the nature of the undecyclonate ester. Would one not be able to front load eq and reach the desired blood concentrations faster in order to maximize a 10 week cycle?

[hugh mungus]

from my personal expirience, my favourite stack is 600mg EQ and 600mg Test Cyp 20 weeks. Quality gains and felt incredible the entire time.

[muscleshark]

Just speaking hypothetically here, but if i'm not mistaken the reason eq needs to be run so long is that it takes a long time to reach high blood concentrations due to the nature of the undecyclonate ester. Would one not be able to front load eq and reach the desired blood concentrations faster in order to maximize a 10 week cycle?

Front loading an incredibly long ester isnt gonna make it kick in faster, just more of a kick when the ester bleeds out.

[waderow]

if you wanted a 10 weeker, i would do test prop, and npp.
but even then i would want to do 12 minimum. it just gets good after 10 or so

[javin86]

if you wanted a 10 weeker, i would do test prop, and npp.
but even then i would want to do 12 minimum. it just gets good after 10 or so

what does the caption read under squat in your avi

[Dk]

what does the caption read under squat in your avi

something along the lines of

Because somewhere out there there is a girl warmin up with your max.



oh and just for the record, those girls legs are photoshopped, that picture has been around a long time haha. i just ruined your world didnt i

[Lukin2grow]

Thanks all. Good advice about the EQ particularly. I'll keep that in mind. 20 weeks eh? Murder on the HPGA axis...Ah well. ;)

[varking]

20 weeks is the only way to grow... throw in some var with that if ya got the money and watch yourself grow..

[canadianmuscle0803]

what does the caption read under squat in your avi

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j269/ALT1981/squat.jpg

[Zeron]

10 weeks simply isnt long enough for Eq. Or for any cycle IMO. You want to see full results of eq then run it out 16 weeks. @10 weeks, your muscles start to mature in thier chemically enhanced state. I feel you hang on to much more when cycles are 12 to 20 weeks long, and more so if you are running Eq. As for your pct questions, aromisin is easier on your lipid profile, and nolva can lower IGF-1 levels at higher longer dosages. CLomid nolva/aromisin and HCG is an awesome pct protocol you can't go wrong with. SO I recommend all three. If you are dead set on a 10 weeker, don't bother wasting your money on Eq.

I agree 16 to 20 week's at 600mg/ anything under 400mg won't do much..It's your body...One of my fav is 600mg EQ week 1-20 500 cyp 500 enth..week 5-20 100mg Tren Ace 100mg Porp...last 5 weeks 25mg Anavar..Gain's, Gain's and more just wounderful....

P.s. 500ui HCH Sub Q from start E.W. & 4 week's after last pin...and some Proviron 25mg human grade 3 week' also 1 week after last pin...Hope that help's

[Zeron]

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j269/ALT1981/squat.jpg

WOW

[Praetorian]

I know EQ is thought best if run for longer cycles. If someone was doing it for 10 weeks (along with test cyp and Anadrol for the first 6 weeks to start), what dosage would you all say is a good mix? Actually, shoot out an ideal dosage /week for all three if you have a suggestion...

And a PCT question. I've read a LOT of opinions on PCT and many things do not agree. Is there a current consensus that Nolvadex is relatively appropriate in almost all cases of PCT? I've heard mixed with Aromasin it's ideal.

I hear both extremes of viewpoints in regards to Clomid...it seems to be totally acceptable as a PCT drug but half of the people think Nolva is preferable.

Any thoughts?

EQ is a greaty misunderstood drug. Even though it is detectable for a long time after discontinuance it actually raises blood leves quite quickly. EQ can be effectlively used in an 8 week cycle not to mention 10 weeks. Depending on your stats and cycle history 100mg EOD is a good start. I would usually run 150mg EOD when combined with other aas. As for nolvadex for PCT...it will help with PCT as it is a weak estrogen which in essence attaches to the estro recptor and blocks actual estrogen from doing its job. By doing this it creates a low estro environment which helps raise natural test levels. If estrogen is too high natural test levels will not be allowed to rise...due to the inherent feedback mechanism. Clomid is a better choice as it does basically the same thing but also acts on the hypothalmus and pituitary which nolvadex does not.
It is always good to run an anti e such as aromasin with HCG and clomid during PCT. That is the best protocol for a speedy recovery.
P

[Lukin2grow]

"As for nolvadex for PCT...it will help with PCT as it is a weak estrogen which in essence attaches to the estro recptor and blocks actual estrogen from doing its job. By doing this it creates a low estro environment which helps raise natural test levels. If estrogen is too high natural test levels will not be allowed to rise...due to the inherent feedback mechanism. Clomid is a better choice as it does basically the same thing but also acts on the hypothalmus and pituitary which nolvadex does not."

I keep reading different articles that veer between saying Nolva is the shit for PCT and the other ones saying Clomid. I guess there's some evidence of both?

[Praetorian]

"As for nolvadex for PCT...it will help with PCT as it is a weak estrogen which in essence attaches to the estro recptor and blocks actual estrogen from doing its job. By doing this it creates a low estro environment which helps raise natural test levels. If estrogen is too high natural test levels will not be allowed to rise...due to the inherent feedback mechanism. Clomid is a better choice as it does basically the same thing but also acts on the hypothalmus and pituitary which nolvadex does not."

I keep reading different articles that veer between saying Nolva is the shit for PCT and the other ones saying Clomid. I guess there's some evidence of both?

Find me a scientific article showing the tamoxifen acts on the hypothalmus and pituitary and Ill agree with you. Most people who have used clomid and feel nolva is superior were not running an anti e concurrently...you need to compare apples to apples.
P

[Lukin2grow]

I did come across something exactly along the lines you ask for...but I don't remember where. Shoot. Well here's an example of the opposing arguments I keep coming across. How do you know what yo believe? :confused:


By: William Llewellyn

Editors Note:
I am extremely pleased to have Bill Llewellyn contributing an article for us this week. For those who are unaware, he is the author of Anabolics 2000 and Anabolics 2002 and is one of the bodybuilding world's foremost experts on androgens and anabolics. He is also the President of Molecular Nutrition, one of the most innovative companies in this business. Along with Avant Labs and ErgoPharm, Molecular Nutrition is one of the few companies dedicated to putting forth only those products backed by legitimate research, rather than excessive hype and other such B.S. Two products, in particular, that deserve to be more well-known are Viritase, a potent anti-estrogen, and Boldione, a boldenone precursor. To find out more about these, and the rest of their products, I reccomend that you head over to their website -- but only after you have finsished reading big Mf'r and spent all of your money on our products, of course :)

Introduction

I have received a lot of heat lately about my preference for Nolvadex over Clomid, which I hold for all purposes of use (in the bodybuilding world anyway); as an anti-estrogen, an HDL (good) cholesterol-supporting drug, and as a testosterone-stimulating compound. Most people use Nolvadex to combat gynecomastia over Clomid anyway, so that is an easy sell.

And for cholesterol, well, most bodybuilders unfortunately pay little attention to this important issue, so by way of disinterest, another easy opinion to discuss. But when it comes to using Nolvadex for increasing endogenous testosterone release, bodybuilders just do not want to hear it. They only seem to want Clomid. I can only guess that this is based on a long rooted misunderstanding of the actions of the two drugs. In this article I would therefore like to discuss the specifics for these two agents, and explain clearly the usefulness of Nolvadex for the specific purpose of increasing testosterone production.

Clomid and Nolvadex

I am not sure how Clomid and Nolvadex became so separated in the minds of bodybuilders. They certainly should not be. Clomid and Nolvadex are both anti-estrogens belonging to the same group of triphenylethylene compounds. They are structurally related and specifically classified as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with mixed agonistic and antagonistic properties. This means that in certain tissues they can block the effects of estrogen, by altering the binding capacity of the receptor, while in others they can act as actual estrogens, activating the receptor.

In men, both of these drugs act as anti-estrogens in their capacity to oppose the negative feedback of estrogens on the hypothalamus and stimulate the heightened release of GnRH (Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone). LH output by the pituitary will be increased as a result, which in turn can increase the level of testosterone by the testes. Both drugs do this, but for some reason bodybuilders persist in thinking that Clomid is the only drug good at stimulating testosterone. What you will find with a little investigation however is that not only is Nolvadex useful for the same purpose, it should actually be the preferred agent of the two.

Studies conducted in the late 1970's at the University of Ghent in Belgium make clear the advantages of using Nolvadex instead of Clomid for increasing testosterone levels (1). Here, researchers looked the effects of Nolvadex and Clomid on the endocrine profiles of normal men, as well as those suffering from low sperm counts (oligospermia). For our purposes, the results of these drugs on hormonally normal men are obviously the most relevant.

What was found, just in the early parts of the study, was quite enlightening. Nolvadex, used for 10 days at a dosage of 20mg daily, increased serum testosterone levels to 142% of baseline, which was on par with the effect of 150mg of Clomid daily for the same duration (the testosterone increase was slightly, but not significantly, better for Clomid). We must remember though that this is the effect of three 50mg tablets of Clomid. With the price of both a 50mg Clomid and 20mg Nolvadex typically very similar, we are already seeing a cost vs. results discrepancy forming that strongly favors the Nolvadex side.

Pituitary Sensitivity to GnRH

But something more interesting is happening. Researchers were also conducting GnRH stimulation tests before and after various points of treatment with Nolvadex and Clomid, and the two drugs had markedly different results. These tests involved infusing patients with 100mcg of GnRH and measuring the output of pituitary LH in response.

The focus of this test is to see how sensitive the pituitary is to Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone. The more sensitive the pituitary, the more LH will be released. The tests showed that after ten days of treatment with Nolvadex, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH increased slightly compared to pre-treated values. This is contrast to 10 days of treatment with 150mg Clomid, which was shown to consistently DECREASE pituitary sensitivity to GnRH (more LH was released before treatment).

As the study with Nolvadex progresses to 6 weeks, pituitary sensitivity to GnRH was significantly higher than pre-treated or 10-day levels. At this point the same 20mg dosage was also raising testosterone and LH levels to an average of 183% and 172% of base values, respectively, which again is measurably higher than what was noted 10 days into therapy. Within 10 days of treatment Clomid is already exerting an effect that is causing the pituitary to become slightly desensitized to GnRH, while prolonged use of Nolvadex serves only to increase pituitary sensitivity to this hormone. That is not to say Clomid won't increase testosterone if taken for the same 6 week time period. Quite the opposite is true. But we are, however, noticing an advantage in Nolvadex.

The Estrogen Clomid

The above discrepancies are likely explained by differences in the estrogenic nature of the two compounds. The researchers' clearly support this theory when commenting in their paper, "The difference in response might be attributable to the weak intrinsic estrogenic effect of Clomid, which in this study manifested itself by an increase in transcortin and testosterone/estradiol-binding globulin [SHBG] levels; this increase was not observed after tamoxifen treatment". In reviewing other theories later in the paper, such as interference by increased androgen or estrogen levels, they persist in noting that increases in these hormones were similar with both drug treatments, and state that," …a role of the intrinsic estrogenic activity of Clomid which is practically absent in Tamoxifen seems the most probable explanation".

Although these two are related anti-estrogens, they appear to act very differently at different sites of action. Nolvadex seems to be strongly anti-estrogenic at both the hypothalamus and pituitary, which is in contrast to Clomid, which although a strong anti-estrogen at the hypothalamus, seems to exhibit weak estrogenic activity at the pituitary. To find further support for this we can look at an in-vitro animal study published in the American Journal of Physiology in February 1981 (2).

This paper looks at the effects of Clomid and Nolvadex on the GnRH stimulated release of LH from cultured rat pituitary cells. In this paper, it was noted that incubating cells with Clomid had a direct estrogenic effect on cultured pituitary cell sensitivity, exerting a weaker but still significant effect compared to estradiol. Nolvadex on the other hand did not have any significant effect on LH response. Furthermore it mildly blocked the effects of estrogen when both were incubated in the same culture.

Conclusion

To summarize the above research succinctly, Nolvadex is the more purely anti-estrogenic of the two drugs, at least where the HPTA (Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Testicular Axis) is concerned. This fact enables Nolvadex to offer the male bodybuilder certain advantages over Clomid.

This is especially true at times when we are looking to restore a balanced HPTA, and would not want to desensitize the pituitary to GnRH. This could perhaps slow recovery to some extent, as the pituitary would require higher amounts of hypothalamic GnRH in the presence of Clomid in order to get the same level of LH stimulation.

Nolvadex also seems preferred from long-term use, for those who find anti-estrogens effective enough at raising testosterone levels to warrant using as anabolics. Here Nolvadex would seem to provide a better and more stable increase in testosterone levels, and likely will offer a similar or greater effect than Clomid for considerably less money. The potential rise in SHBG levels with Clomid, supported by other research (3), is also cause for concern, as this might work to allow for comparably less free active testosterone compared to Nolvadex as well.

Ultimately both drugs are effective anti-estrogens for the prevention of gyno and elevation of endogenous testosterone, however the above research provides enough evidence for me to choose Nolvadex every time.

In next month's follow-up article I will be discussing the role anti-estrogens play in post-cycle testosterone recovery. Most specifically, I will be detailing what a proper post-cycle ancillary drug program looks like, and explain why anti-estrogens alone are not effective during this window of time.